[...] Can we actually add anything specific to the lists of things "analogues" are or aren't, or can or can't do? Anything to distinguish what he's saying from tipsy rambling?
[...]

I'd hazard a guess, this is exactly what Our Artist really subtly hints us not to do - we shouldn't try to piece Miho together, He doesn't want the story to collapse under the weight of our expectations... we must tread carefully

I'd hazard a guess, this is exactly what Our Artist really subtly hints us not to do - [...]

Well sure, I certainly didn't intend to imply that Fred was being rambly / incoherent there. My working assumption is that Fred's choice of the flaky mooching lush for the only real "description" of "analogues" in-comic so far was quite deliberate.

No I mean "reliable/unreliable observer" in the technical sense, are we getting useful information out of him here (is the author using the character to convey things the author actually thinks, or on the contrary using him more for {f}red herrings)?

How could we as audience ever be able beforehand to discern what things are going to end up like, what in story is there that lets us tell. (The meta, reading the author's mind a prior, is another matter, but seems always a losing game.) My belief has usually been that whatever answers we come up with should derive from story materials only, that if it isn't in story comic somewhere, it doesn't count. (Although not that everything in story comic has meaning and importance.) The only way to really know is for story to tell us via words or images. If it hasn't, in some way, there effectively is no answer yet. Until it's in a finalized/posted story comic, it isn't there; ideas and plans can and do change even during creation, certainly before.

Whatever we want otherwise, what's in story about Analogues directly is in two places, the interrogator guy in 1271 and Ibara in 1239. That's all, except for whatever story material helps further explain those two people in the comics before and after each use of Analogue. There is then indirectly anything else in story that might help support building a tentative definition. What that is, extensive and arguable. Simpler, does it appear that stories form themselves around Miho as she moves around. Characters and roles in situations to people in ways at times. If so, maybe that's what an Analogue is. If that's an Analogue Support Facility, and Miho was a valid "guest" there, then perhaps she's an Analogue. That's kind of what we have to work with, in the context of some 1400 to 1500 other comics aside from ~1271 and ~1239.

All we can do is try and piece it together from other materials to get a better idea, but as much as we wish it was well explained in a known authoritative manner, we don't and can't yet know if it has been. We shouldn't get rabid about it and camp her spawn point though.

Again, after reading 1240 and its neighbors, what exactly do we know about "analogues" (actual concrete stuff, not fluff like "her character became far more real than she ever was")?

That supposedly Miho is one and that it involves creating stories and emotions for audiences. Such as what happened with Erika's fans, and a number of times earlier on Miho apparently has emotions revitalize her, and the way people seem to be drawn into whatever sort of fictional orbits she creates here and there, Piro, Ping, Largo, Ed, etc.

Whichever way we determine it, if we're trying to define the term Analogue, we only have what we have, most all of which is decidedly not concrete. How would somebody best explain imagination personified, describe what a muse does, detail the workings of a goddess, put the operation of a demon's power into words; and to do that sort of thing for people who don't know anything about it or who believe none of it even while experiencing it. How concrete then can it be to say, that observers take what they think and feel about a character and a plot, and their perceptions of what is true is more important to them than the facts are. What does one demonstrate to somebody else that proves that is true, except by building a case and investigating the available evidence to deduce or induce conclusions?

Can we actually add anything specific to the lists of things "analogues" are or aren't, or can or can't do? Anything to distinguish what he's saying from tipsy rambling?

It didn't appear all that tipsy and rambling. Even if so, it seems all we can do is add anything in story that tends to support Miho as some sort of source of stories and the things that go along with stories. To look for things in story that tend to disprove that notion, and try and come up with another tentative explanation or definition when needed. Some answer anywhere from a force of nature that creates plots and characters and situations, or some female with a few powers, some illusions, and delusions of grandeur.

As far as Ibara himself, attacking the messenger likely doesn't help in thinking about the messages, and more so, him being a snake is largely in and of itself unimportant when trying to answer the question, in defining Analogue. Or in discussing if the term really means anything to begin with. Taking the snake part as a grain of salt, laying it aside to see what impact it has with and without it. Does he have a reason to know something about Miho, is there a reason he'd be lying about it to Junko, does what he say fit anything else we know or think we know, would he know what Miho is roughly, does any of what he says match her behaviors or what his apparent peers Ed and Dom have said and done. That all is gained only from looking at a great many other things in comic. Ed looking at a readout and freaking out. Of course that Ibara is apparently an abusive thieving lush slacker etc might have some bearing on how importantly we take his perceptions on their own. And yes, most everything we get from everyone in MT is perception, and yes, a great amount of what everyone says apparently traces back to Miho or wherever she's from somehow. So we do indeed have to be more careful the more unreliable the information, and do more correlating of all the material from such places. Miho is very inconsistent and there are huge gaps in information and she is exceedingly vague, seems no help directly. And even though all we have of the usage of the word analogue is by the interrogator and Ibara, we can if needed discard all of what both say, if none of what they said fits. It shouldn't be used if it's worthless, just because it's all there is. Toss it, and not count that anyone has called her that. Which doing so would leave us with Ed and Ibara calling her the real thing, or what Dom has said about her usefulness and import, or Ibara talking about her as a story type source.

Yet it's probably not too surprising our "insider information" about Miho is from those we've been presented with as insiders. Flawed agenda-driven insiders. If we discount it all simply because of who the material is from (Ibara looks a horrible dad and low-life sort, Dom is a violent cynical opportunist, and Ed is a violent psychopath) then that seems to leave us with Miho. Which by behavior and circumstance is a lot of what we have to figure out what an analogue/the real thing/source would be anyway. Which is in large part the situations and her explanations and "answers" at the apartment, in the gaps, at the bathhouse and at the school -- Chapter 11. And a number of things in Chapter 10, including Yuki finding her not dead at the ASF and Miho goading Yuki to take her to the Dance of the Evils. And lots of background and supporting materials in the other 10 chapters before them.

But if we do look to Ibara to begin with, we have seen Junko is at the least very predisposed to not listen to anything her father has to say. She's hostile at the school, she's angry at him for his going to the CoE. Yet she seems to accept this CoE explanation of Miho, at least as she understands that explanation in light of what she is aware of already, and however much as she accepts him as the explainer of it. As she also appears to believe him, to some extent, when she accuses him at the CoE of being hammered and he say he's not had "much". But about Miho, the questions are does Ibara have the correct information, and are his perceptions of what he's been given correct. (if we assume he's not just lying) Certainly we have some idea he should have some information, and might guess yes or no about the perceptions from what he's said and how that fits what we are aware of. Yet Ibara is an insider, and he's apparently not overcome with hatred of Miho, and he doesn't want to either ignore or destroy her. There is that. But like the interrogator doesn't appear at all aware of what Miho has been doing out in the world or Piro's large role in it over time, it could be that Ibara is very truthfully giving Junko an explanation of a little bit of wrong information that he doesn't even understand correctly, and he's extrapolating it out. That what he says is worthless. Which would have not much to do with him being a jerk or even if he wasn't. The tricky thing here is deciding which or an alternative you believe, and wait to see if the tentative conclusion turns out to be correct if we ever get an actual answer.

I don't know what exactly he's been doing in the "industry" these past few decades, but based on this bit (EDIT again I mean 1240 and friends) I'm leaning a lot more toward "ad copy" than "user manuals".

He's been staying on the outside of the more aggressive methods and goals of Sony and Sega, and he does appear (and maybe has mentioned) he's not so much a field operative as much as an executive or something, because, Nintendo. I think also Ed and/or Dom say they scared him out of play. Which I suppose then Miho's stories brought him back out, due to high stakes and that sort of thing. That's all a kind of personification of what the games are and that the people in the companies are like that too, so it's a pretty meta sort of thing, more playing with the tropes. (Like a lot of things, maybe not to take too seriously; Meimi and her striped bowl, origami-folded too-low bail, Largo attacking ravers or having his shoes blown off.)

Although again, none of Ibara's personal failings makes him wrong about how he explains what Miho is to Junko. Even if it's vague and incomplete. The same way that even if he was beyond reproach, it would not make him right about it. And also, as far as we know we are still in the middle of the demonstration Miho wanted to give Piro about what's up with her. So a better "more official" explanation might only be a way off, and from what we see, not from what anyone in MT explains.

I'd hazard a guess, this is exactly what Our Artist really subtly hints us not to do - we shouldn't try to piece Miho together, He doesn't want the story to collapse under the weight of our expectations... we must tread carefully

Yeah, except we have behind the scenes information, and have seen a number of other MT people's viewpoints and actions, and don't have access to pictures/chats on the laptop or all of the material Junko had Ping post. We're partial insiders.

How could we as audience ever be able beforehand to discern what things are going to end up like, what in story is there that lets us tell.

Oh I'm not demanding let alone claiming ability to predict future developments; but as you read you build up a general impression of the character / plot device. My general impression of Ibara so far is that I'm not going to attach too much weight to what he says (especially about evidently key components like "analogues") until I get some kind of further confirmation in the strip (e.g. either someone else higher up on the "reliable observer" scale saying similar or at least non-contradictory things, or else Ibara doing something to suggest he's not as big a flake as I've so far thought him to be).

EDIT:

It didn't appear all that tipsy and rambling.

Hmm, if I am the only one seeing it that way I guess I better expand a little. (Alternatively if anyone got a coherent, lucid, operational understanding of "analogues" from Ibara in that scene I would be very interested in hearing about it.)

I get "tipsy" (mildly, as I said he's not slurring or anything) from his going on and on about something Junko is obviously at best tangentially interested in, blithely ignorant of her heroic attempts to rein in her obvious irritation with him and his droning when she has better things to do. Just like the guy in the bar you sit down next to who immediately realizes you will be completely engrossed in everything he has to say for the next ninety minutes. Just like Largo when he only has one or two beer cans sticking out of his hair (as opposed to being surrounded by piles of them), who will go on and on about ph34rb0t deployment while those around him become more and more glass-eyed.

As for rambling, ok, granted he doesn't really repeat himself or anything like that. I mean rambling in the sense of not really getting anywhere though. A lot of "real"s and "feel"s but by the end of it we have pretty much zero new usable information on the subject. Frame by frame (just 1240, and I have cut out a lot of the fluffy adjectives and such):

Tohya is... the source of a... story type.

Ok. Cool. Source of a story type. So, the source of a bunch of stories. Which is usually either another story, or else based in some (near or distant) way on folks/events that actually happened (strongly implied in the later pirate story with Kimiko that Tohya's situation is the latter). So this happens all the time (things being "sources of stories"), do they all get to be analogues? What makes analogues special if not? A "kid dying too young" is like literally 90% of human history, a guy gets married, she has a bunch of children, a bunch of them die, she dies in childbirth, his next wife has a bunch more kids a bunch of which die, then she dies in childbirth, rinse lather repeat. It was the rule not the exception, not even noteworthy until say Dickens' time let alone "potent and enduring", so what made Tohya special?

her story... grew a life of its own.

Sure, lots of people say that, we all love our stories; oh wait, you mean literally alive? First question, "WTF? HOW???" I mean Gandalf is totally awesome but my thinking that doesn't make him pop up on Michigan avenue; you don't see Han and Luke zipping across the skies of the Midwest no matter how big an "emotive response" (read nerdgasm) that might generate in the population. But Ibara sails right past, the question isn't important or doesn't even exist to him. He's not trying to explain anything, just going through what I called the "ad copy", the brochure you hand the rookies who won't be working anywhere near the "analogues", not so they'll actually understand anything but just to keep them from wasting their bosses' time with stupid questions.

The more people it touched, the more her story grew.

Yeah, that's all good stories. Plenty of not-so-good ones for that matter. Not all stories sure, but a heck of a lot. Why do some get to become "analogues"? Why Tohya in particular? Ibara's definitely going somewhere with this, right?

...her character became far more real than she ever was.

Again, where the heck is my Gandalf? Heck, if we are talking about more, how to phrase this politely, "potent" emotional responses, where the heck is my Samantha Carter? (gratuitous Red Dwarf quote: "I would go with Betty... but I'd be thinkin' of Wilma.") Again this could be said of anyone from any halfway decent story, except for the whole "no I mean actually coming to life alive, and then repeatedly reincarnating" thing, which he again completely sails past.

...people want to experience... what her story makes them feel.

Um. So that's, like, the punchline, what he was building toward in a totally concrete and useful and not at all rambling way. Pretty much the basic definition of a story, any old story; and this tells us what about "analogues" specifically, as opposed to any story ever?

I finally realized earlier today exactly what scene this bit with Ibara was reminding me of. Ok, it's a paraphrase, not a quote, but...

Okay, yes, we don't actually know that he doesn't have a clue, I am not seriously making that positive claim. I'm just saying the in-comic evidence doesn't incline me to believe I've learned anything useful from him; maybe all this actually means something, I just find it more likely that the actual deal with analogues is either above his pay grade, or (perhaps) not stuff he's actually willing to share with Junko (he's only giving her the fluff for now).

(I'm not saying "Ibara is Bad(TM) so what he is saying about analogues can't be true"; I am saying "after repeated reading I can't parse anything useful out of what he's saying about analogues, so, given that his other in-comic behavior has been mostly flaky, I am going to hold it on the back burner until I hear something else in-comic about analogues." The two observations "flaky analogue speech" and "flaky general behavior" make sense to me as consistent with one another, I'm not using one to justify an assumption about the other. Don't think I am anyway. )

Last edited by darrin on Mon Mar 26, 2018 5:28 pm, edited 2 times in total.

Indeed. A few more trustworthy fully explained accurate "authoritative" titles and examples of what Miho is exactly. Not sure that's anywhere near arriving though. And (depending on one's perspective of course) there hasn't seemed to be anyone above our kindly game company crazies. Well, besides corporate. Yes of course, of the three flawed examples only Ibara hasn't as of yet been running around blowing things up, pointing weapons at people, coercing, being confrontational with the likes of Erika and Junpei, or trying to retire Ping and eliminate Miho. All of which seem to be well within their rights certainly. Although I'm not quite sure how Ibara not doing those more violent destructive things makes him less reliable than Ed or Dom, maybe it's his halfway implementing being a villain, or who he's mean to in what ways? They just do it to strangers, he's brusque to and manipulative of his daughter, and her having the hard knocks. Whatever that says about how believable he is about what he calls Miho. It could be quite informative I guess.

Not that any of those three guys know what they're talking about to begin with. Yet meeting their bosses, or anyone else's, like whoever is above Masamichi (even though he only sideways describes Miho, as relates to Meimi and the episode with Erika) that all seems unlikely. Although as I've also pointed out, nothing is ever sure in MT, the girl who finds a book bag may be an MG, the seeming world-wise calm-headed teenager may turn out to be a coercive blackmailer type. But so far, nobody high up has been involved in much at all, much less has been explaining anything to anyone. (Which I'm discounting any idea that anyone believes Miho is in charge of anything, or that Head Ninja or someone like that is going to arrive and explain Miho to anyone, or that FG is going to make a direct appearance in the story.) Maybe we'll get something soon that's more solid from what Junpei's (grand)mother(sister) is doing, but I wouldn't necessarily hold my breath on that one.

Although some of the whole discussion seems to depend on what one thinks about our other seeming source of Miho information that isn't her. Who calls her a subject in an Analogue Support Facility, that she has representations in games and the like. If Miho is accepted as "a subject at a facility that supports analogues" then Ibara is also correct about at least one thing, depending on how one takes comments about the real thing, or source. Whatever any of those things mean, or if one is even interested in defining them.

But much of that is only arguing about the labels given her by one or more of Ed, Dom, and Ibara. Whatever information that is known by game company enforcers/operatives, which might be less than nothing. Ed looks up an alarm readout and calls her the real thing, which Ibara calls her too. Does that mean anything that two semi-independent sources explain it -- well that depends on what the observer believes the real thing is or if Miho might fit it. Same thing goes for source of a (which I believe to be many or all, but might actually be none) particular story type, which we hear from Ibara once and Miho a few times(which as with just about everything she says ever, indirectly and vaguely). Same thing goes for analogue, as in the name of the place from the interrogator and what Ping is trying to mimic from Ibara. These are only labels from three (four) people that as far as we know got all of their information from Miho in the first place anyway, and she is at best unreliable. (While none of our game company people necessarily have any reason to carry on trickery, we probably can't at all say the same about one who appears to do nothing but that.)

Yet my point is still that if one accepts her as an Analogue, and wants to define that term, there are two direct examples of her being called that thing, with some explanation, and a bunch of circumstance and illustration from comic 98 to now. If she's not believed to be an analogue, nothing really much matters about who said it why. But if one does accept her as an Analogue, there's at least one thing that two separate unrelated (as far as we know) people have said, one to Piro and one to Junko. If one accepts that both people are accurate about that one thing (that Miho is one), it might seem the explanation about it to Junko be acceptable for now, but only because it also describes Miho the same way the other person did -- that characters and stories et al are made from her. Which not just one "confirmation" of that sort, there's also she has said such to Kimiko, and described (in a far more Miho way) to Piro. There's no need for what interogator or Ibara have said, just use a different term to describe it. Then as a related matter, if we're not going to believe anything from Ibara, why anything from Ed or Dom either? If that's the case, whatever the interrogator said might be bogus, who is he anyway, he didn't even know about what's going on in MT. Which easily enough leaves us with no terms to define. That's awesome, we don't need them. They get in the way of answering the question for those who might want it answered.

So leave the terms alone, they don't matter. We can just explain what Miho might be from a number of things we have seen.

We've seen stories, with at least two characters involved, probably more, seemingly forming and being torn apart etc around her and those around her. The fake not-a-ninja pretending and expressing a desire to die that the real ninja (who is also older than she looks) does not take seriously or take the bait for. Controlling the emotional mechanisms of an entire MMO. Being the mysterious foil to foreigners, the manipulative cyberfrienemy, the ill schoolgirl, the mistress of a dance club. Leaping around shotgun blasts and sabotaging energy weapons. A vast arcane psionic power destroying a building and trying to drag her down to whatever alternate dimensions they came from, before they return to being somewhat normal humans, apparently. She's traveled with a human in tow interdimensionally (and earlier had leapt out of both an exploding diner in nanasawaseconds with another human and with herself from a killball vortex), drawn in and mentored/insulted/partied-with emerging magical girls in at least two cases, crushed vans without effort after rescuing her ex-long-distance-lover's current girlfriend who she then takes to her place and a radio show. Tried to get a hookup going between the game robot girl and the subject of her evil mindgames, as she tries to manipulate the other subject of her evil mindgames again in another way. Is the rich girl kidnapped by pirates who becomes one, then becomes a social disgrace after the rest of the pirarte are caught and executed. Sitting on phone poles, walking then vanishing off power lines. The fun-loving happy friend of the robot taking her pictures. Panicking all day, shoved in the chest to finish it, then revived and pacemaker inserted, before tearing herself out of bed and demolishing the place. Survived a mass attempt at neutralizing her by an overwhelming force of heroes and robots, and the backup ninja.

We don't need anyone in MT to help us give that a name. We just have to decide what to use to describe it.

Although I'm not quite sure how Ibara not doing those more violent destructive things makes him less reliable than Ed or Dom, maybe it's his halfway implementing being a villain, or who he's mean to in what ways?

That probably wasn't specifically directed at me but for the record oh HECK no. Don't even get me started on those two.

But talking specifically about reliability I would say it is a difference in kind not degree. Okay, I do consider Ibara's reliability as not-well-established in the comic, primarily because I don't see much evidence of his competence (the evidence seems to point against competence in family matters; in work matters, there is not much to go on, unless one is willing to read between the lines and assume the "new opportunity" he talks about is actually a demotion, being made to do the job for which he was supposed to hire someone else and manage them).

Dom on the other hand is quite competent, but I can't call him "reliable" in the sense we've been using, because instead of actually trying to pay attention to what he is saying and weigh the probability of it being valid or useful, I would be too busy keeping one hand on my wallet and one hand scratching my head wondering when he was going to get around to bending me over the nearest flat surface and reaming me in half in a professional or personal capacity. If you're not taking what Dom says with a grain of salt you are likely to end up taking it with a lead slug in the back of the skull, wondering with your last breath "But... but... he was standing in front of me..."

Ed is best dealt with by being somewhere else. Why the heck would you talk to Ed let alone listen to him.

Dom and Ed used to be 'friends' or at least more friendly with Largo and Piro. Now Dom & Ed went all corporate and have interest in persons and characters which Piro and Largo play their roles too, and they stop at nothing (Ed killballs Miho, and (so far) fails to kill Ping, Dom harasses (or tries to, but fails so far) Erika and Kimiko)... subtle hint at what corporations do to you

But talking specifically about reliability I would say it is a difference in kind not degree. Okay, I do consider Ibara's reliability as not-well-established in the comic, primarily because I don't see much evidence of his competence (the evidence seems to point against competence in family matters; in work matters, there is not much to go on, unless one is willing to read between the lines and assume the "new opportunity" he talks about is actually a demotion, being made to do the job for which he was supposed to hire someone else and manage them).

It would seem quite reasonable that if both Sony and Sega were muscling you (especially with those two) the sensible thing for Nintendo would be to bide your time and do it elsewhere (especially for how he seems to be personally). Personal doesn't establish professional, and while there is more of the first (and negative) and less of the second (an unclear), he certainly seemed at least focused and with a goal at the CoE . (Which of course we could blame Junko herself for that, having Ping release the Miho material, but perhaps her father had started plotting even earlier, when he saw out Ping was there out in the wild.) Yet it wasn't really about what he was trying to do (it seems it would have been, and was, a large failure) or why he was trying do to it. It was about if he knows anything valid about Miho or what she might be. Knows it from his capacity as an insider or as somebody that works for Nintendo and what they might use her powers for, whatever his information sources are. Although it seems we are unable to judge the information sources anyone has, since we don't know what they are. Other than some data somewhere some people have access to. Apparently.

Whatever the personal traits of these three from Sony Sega Nintendo, it's been made pretty clear for quite a while that they are more clued in about who is what. Aside from the general "surprising" nature of "facts" in MT casting doubt on most things. Yet Ed knows all about Ping and finds out about Miho, Dom knows about Kimiko from early on and has opinions on Miho, and there's not much reason (especially in that context) to doubt much that Ibara had or acquired the same sorts of info on Miho. The way he puts it to Junko, he might have known it before the current events, and has had time to think about it more too. Ibara views Miho not as a threat or a waste like the other two, but as an opportunity. Not surprising, those three have obvious differences in perception about a whole lot of things. Yes, sure, it might be a demotion from a more managerial position to be talent scouting, but 'successfully hiring Miho for content' would probably be some sort of huge victory.

Yes, he clearly appears wrong that she's anywhere near manageable or stable. Even if she was those things, maybe she wouldn't agree (if it's even possible for her to do so) or be of use for what he has in mind. But I'm not really trying to gauge how or how correctly he perceives his chances at hiring her or judge how well that might work. Probably, he can't and it wouldn't. He can be quite wrong about that but still know enough. And indeed, none of the three of them appears to be any good at taking whatever they do know information-wise and keeping it that way. They start emotionally feeling things, based upon more what seems some fantasy wish fulfillment, instead of whatever the more realistic things that they are aware of are. Their facts turn into fiction. Ed moves into a story that doesn't suggest fear of her apparent invincibility and how much she overclasses him until she stops bothering. Dom dismisses her as no longer a valid force as she's smashing his vehicle with no effort and otherwise toys with him. Ibara believes she's calm controllable and hirable to the point of implementing a detailed use of her for the good of his company and career, like a prospector convinced of a motherload that consists of pyrite.

That is, there are the 'facts as they know them' from the data about her that exists that they have access to. Then, there is what they start thinking it means in some personal emotional feeling story way once they get involved. We see Ed look something up, the interrogator has at least some access to it as well based upon his role and what he says to Piro, somebody is turning it into games and stories, there's what Masamichi says about her and the Erika incident and past with Meimi, and the ASF has whatever records an ASF keeps. As far as using the information, Masamichi appears professionally powerless to cataclysm-manage her (so she doesn't bother too much messing with his head?) The interrogator is missing what she's up to and who is involved in it. And the Sega Sony Nintendo people she's interacting with, that data becomes some sort of story to them, for them, with them.

Which again, we don't need to trust or believe what anyone says about her to anyone, we don't need to use the real thing or analogue or source to describe her. There is quite a lot of material in comic that shows what she seems to be, even if we don't know what to call it, why she has it, what it is. Or what her ultimate goals may see, if goal there be. Whatever she is, and whatever anyone calls her, it appears stories form around her. That's a fairly easy simple way to put it. Although, isn't that a case of not putting her together and just accepting how it resonates rather than trying to understand the details we don't have? Take the golden eggs, leave the goose alone. It sort of illustrates itself, which seems pretty real. Doesn't matter if it is at that point, one might say.

How roles change, see... Dom and Ed used to be 'friends' or at least more friendly with Largo and Piro. Now Dom & Ed went all corporate and have interest in persons and characters which Piro and Largo play their roles too, and they stop at nothing (Ed killballs Miho, and (so far) fails to kill Ping, Dom harasses (or tries to, but fails so far) Erika and Kimiko)... subtle hint at what corporations do to you

Ah, before Miho impacted, Ed and Dom had goals. Most of which wasn't palling around with Largo and Piro, or trying to kill Miho, or being reconstituted, or having Miho and Erika and Junpei and Yuki breaking and stealing their vehicles or weapons.

Although it seems that when it comes down to it, the friendlies (enemends, frienemies) defer. Dom is somewhat diplomatic with Erika eventually and isn't quite as aggressive to Kimiko as time goes on either, and at Megagamers gives Piro time to do whatever he wants. Ed at the CoE isn't upset that Largo has to stop him. Is there more, in more confrontational or dangerous ways, well none of our game company folks have shown back up yet.

Only recently, while re-reading the entire comic, it occurred to me that Ibara senior is working for Nintendo... His weaponry is awesome though, a Wii controller he managed to smash Ed with a Tetris block, some skill. Wonder what else his 'magic wand' can do.

That being said, would this be the last we see Dom and Ed ? Ed is a pancake or more like a puddle of moisture, since CoE blast. Dom looked like he'd need ample time in hospital, if he survived at all, after the Megagamers blast...

Only recently, while re-reading the entire comic, it occurred to me that Ibara senior is working for Nintendo... His weaponry is awesome though, a Wii controller he managed to smash Ed with a Tetris block, some skill. Wonder what else his 'magic wand' can do.

Are you talking about 1260? In that one he was aiming for Ed, but managed to clock poor Mugi. (It's Erika giving Ed an elbow to the face that seems to put an end to his shenanigans there; as far as I can tell the tetris block, whatever causes it to fall, is kind of an insult-to-injury thing...)

Yeah 1260... Actually the face that disappeared from behind Erika under the Tetris block, is Ed. He did get an elbow too, but Mugi's face is on the same side as Kimiko just as Kenji is. In one panel lower, the hamster is dropping bombs on the remains.
The man with the Wiimote only elbowed his way past Mugi and Kenji.

Yeah 1260... Actually the face that disappeared from behind Erika under the Tetris block, is Ed. He did get an elbow too,

I know, that's what I said above, Erika hits Ed.

but Mugi's face is on the same side as Kimiko just as Kenji is.[...]
The man with the Wiimote only elbowed his way past Mugi and Kenji.

Ibara does a lot more to poor Mugi than just elbow past her. Read down vertically from panels 1 to 4 to 7. In 1 he has his arms raised, and Mugi has just unwittingly placed her noggin in the line of fire. In 4 he has brought his arms down, but the "WONK!" is on that same noggin, one fox-ear of which is just visible to the right of Ibara's wrist. (The transcript confirms for that panel that it's Mugi <yaipe!>ing in pain there.) In 7 Ibara is no longer visible; my guess is Kenji has grabbed and restrained him, while a woozy Mugi tries to get back up.

I guess you're right, because then in [1340], Kenji says 'That old man totally cocked you'... still it seems like an 'amusing' weapon, the Wiimote and Tetris blocks. (and the story arcs from [744] - Nintendo finally has a worthy opponent for Ed and Dom, heh)

I'm far from the only one, but ya. I said a while ago I was looking to move elsewhere but have just not had the time these past few months. (I note with amusement that photobucket has since backed down from $400/year to "only" $200 for "non-commercial" users; not that I will be sticking with them long-term no matter how "low" the price goes, but I am looking forward to seeing how many factors of 2 they drop in price before they finally stop circling the drain so to speak.)

EDIT: (@cidjen below)
Getting off-topic here sorry so I won't comment past this one, but I will say that although my stuff is still visible directly at the site, the overwhelming number of pop-ups and video ads you have to wade through would make the experience intensely unpleasant at best (one of the reasons I was thinking of when I said above I have no plans to stay even if their price were to drop back to $0).

Last edited by darrin on Mon Jan 29, 2018 6:12 pm, edited 2 times in total.

I'm far from the only one, but ya. I said a while ago I was looking to move elsewhere but have just not had the time these past few months. (I note with amusement that photobucket has since backed down from $400/year to "only" $200 for "non-commercial" users; not that I will be sticking with them long-term no matter how "low" the price goes, but I am looking forward to seeing how many factors of 2 they drop in price before they finally stop circling the drain so to speak.)

On (un)related note, I can see/read your rescripts directly on photobucket (hillarious!) but when I copy/paste the url of your avatar to new tab, it still comes up with the paywall image...

After I 'just' navigated to the photobucket site, it was OK - I could see all @darrin's pictures; not sure which one is now selected by @darrin for his avatar, but they are all visible.
(I use Firefox in Private Browsing mode + ABP)